About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20
.org/history. >> yesterday, a senate homeland security subcommittee on contract oversight looked at afghanistan reconstruction contracts. witnesses include contractors to receive money from the u.s. agency for international development and the army corps of engineers as well as defense department and usaid officials. missouri democratic senator clear ms. castle -- clare mccaskill chaired the two-hour hearing. if the witnesses have become -- i have a formal statement prepared but i have decided not to give a formal opening statement. and just express the reason for this hearing. this is not the first hearing we have had in the subcommittee on contract thing in our contingency operation. and i began working on this problem almost the day i wrought -- arrived in the senate. when i travel to iraq to do nothing but look at contracting oversight because i couldn't figure out how in the world things had gotten so out of control in terms of contacting in iraq. i went over to iraq and i realized why they had gotten out of control. contract and representatives were just a low man on the total bowl being
and a with scott miller. >> david axe was imbedded with the u.s. army in afghanistan. it is his fourth visit to the country. he spent time with the 4th airbourne, patrolling in remote areas and engaging the security situation. obama announced a plan to bring 10,000 troops home from afghanistan by the end of the year. >> it depends on where you are. my experience is in the east. i have a little experience in the south. in the south, there is a lot of open combat. this is the headquarters of the taliban. >> in the east the violence depends on where you are. these to have strong relationships with kabul, with a lot of traffic. today, these are what i call, bombing galleries, where the coalition troops and a large coalition presence is trying very hard to like this town in order to protect this. but every step that they take, they are threatened. thousands every year, that are killing hundreds of native troops, and many times the number of afghans. as we move closer to the border, and you had se, the threat will change. this is not so much ied's because there is less vehicle traffic. the coaliti
of afghanistan, its abilities to reestablish the safe haven. in other words, we in to render the heart of al qaeda and capable of launching attacks on our homeland, citizens, our allies, as well as preventing this group and its affiliates and adherents from doing so. at the same time, hopefully a kid and means to address the serious threat posed by the -- this does not require a global war. it does require a focus on specific regions, including what we might call the periphery, places like yemen, somalia, iraq -- it is another important distinguishing factor. it has looked increasingly to other groups and individuals to take a because, including the gold strike and the united states. we a specific and focus counter- terrorism and objectives. we're protecting our home and by constantly reducing our vulnerability is and not acting -- and adapting our abilities. we're the greatest al qaeda's capabilities and disrupting its operation. we're degrading the capability of al qaeda senior leadership to inspire, to nicki with, and direct the operations of its adherents from the world. we are aggressiv
and afghanistan. it will serve as an insurance policy for the future interactions between afghanistan and the united states. host: what is your country doing currently to prepare for the pullout of the 33,000 troops by 2014? guest: we have made a plann. we have areas already identified from different parts of the country where our security forces will take full responsibility for security while the international coalition forces will gradually pulled u back. other elements for securing various will develop and surge. to get the heart and mind of the people, we should deliver basic services based on their needs. we should have projects in those areas. meanwhile, we should work with communities directly on things they need based on the properties that our government should deliver it to them. host: which area is the most dangerous and poses the most challenges for the security forces? guest: the seven areas are chosen carefully in different parts of the country. those areas are quite calm right now. there's not much challenge as far as security is concerned. we will see when we start th
rodriguez says he doesn't expect violence in afghanistan to start decreasing until next year. from the pentagon earlier today, this is 45 minutes. >> general rodriguez, it's counselor dave lapin at the pentagon. if you're ready to go, i'll introduce you and we'll get started. >> ok, dave, go ahead, thanks. >> thank you. good morning to those here, good evening in afghanistan. i'd like to welcome pack to the pentagon briefing room, army lieutenant general david rodriguez. he's commander of the international security assistance force joint command, also known as i.j.c. and also the deputy commander of the united states forces afghanistan. general rodriguez's current tour began in june, 2009, he became the first commander of the i.j.c. in october of that year. prior to that, general rodriguez was commander of regional command east for 15 months from january, 2007 to april, 2008. next week after two straight years in command and more than 40 months in after gap stan over the past 4 1/2 year, general rodriguez is ski wruled to change command and return stateside to have u.s. army forces
in afghanistan. fourthly, a plan of a special envoy -- appointment of a special envoy. when you make these recommendations, are you saying we're not curly undertaking any of them or do you see some of them as an expansion of what we are doing? or as i was in before, more of a focused approach? >> sir, i served in iraq and afghanistan. you see again and again, usaid, the state department, having difficulties. it when i started working on yemen, it is a familiar situation to me, although, it is not iraq and afghanistan. it is focused on working with local partners that may or may not work in the areas we are mostly concerned with. it is overly centralized, very focused on process and sort of the factions that in the national capital. i cannot take with the political opposition is. that is the political opposition we need to be worried about. but we do not have a good understanding of the human terrain. and iraq, could almost happen by accident. -- it on this happen by accident. i think most of our human terrain is probably focused on the counter-terrorism mission. it is not about the h
to debate the timing of our military drawdown in afghanistan. my belief is that the general's voice should carry the most weight. what is wrong as for the republican party to shrink from the challenges of american leadership in the world. history repeatedly warns us that in the long run, weakest and foreign policy cost us and our children much more than we will ever say in the budget -- saved in the budget line item. america has one political party devoted to decline and withdrawal it doesn't need a second one. our enemies respect and respond to strength. sometimes strength means military intervention. sometimes it means diplomatic pressure. that always means moral clarity in word and deed. that is the legacy of republican foreign policy at its best in our next republican president must carry the banner around the world. of equality and opportunity for all citizens, it remains a dream for people in the middle east and around the world. as america stands for these principles and stands with our friends and allies, the middle east will transform this moment of turbulence into a more lasting
and done, iraq and afghanistan will suck the treasury dry to the tune of at least $3.7 trillion. enough already. mr. chairman, the pentagon is like that teenager. you keep giving the kid the keys to the car and he keeps crashing it. it's time we cut him off. we must draw the line and we must draw it here. no more money for libya. no more continuance in libyan hostilities. i urge my colleagues, support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. poe: the gentleman says we have gone to war in the name of humanity. in other words, the president's war in libya is so that we can preserve humanity in libya. in the history of peoples, as the gentleman from california has pointed out, in the histories of countries, it has always been the king, the dictator, the tyrant, the chief, the leader that has sent that particular country to war. so when our ancestors got together and they formed a new and perfect union, they decided it would not be the leader,
university professor. after this break, we will talk more politics and legislation and afghanistan with our roundtable, conn carroll and jamelle bouie. be right back. ♪ >> monday on c-span, the dali lama -- dalai lama and martin luther king, jr.'s speechwriter. they spoke about a number of topics, including the death penalty. >> the number of people who kill through violence -- are killed through violence, over 200 million. but problem not solved. i think that people lay down a seed of hatred. >> watch this discussion monday at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> monday night on c-span, look back at president nixon's foreign policy. members of his administration and the president's son-in-law discuss topics including communism in china, invading north vietnam, and the 1967 war in the middle east. >> the discussion then in the newspapers were nixon's secret plan for peace. what was it? of course, he never talked about it. that was rockefeller pushing nixon to say something, to expose what his plan was. rockefeller did not think that nixon had a plan. he comes in after a hard day of campaigning
. caller: donald trump wants to set went to iraq and afghanistan because they were oil-rich nations. we won the war. i don't think and buying debt these days. host: about what the question that those did contribute to the problems we are having right now. guest: everything did continue. the question is what percentage. i would disagree saying the president has tremendous leverage. he has no leverage. the democrats and the republicans and congress are going to make this deal. one or both of them are going to leave town and dump it on his lap. the poling is really unhelpful, often ends in these things. on one hand they want cuts and spending. they an over 60% want the capital plan. the president is appearing more favorable than congress. the president always does. the president's rating have been going down dramatically. because of that. because the president doesn't feel comfortable, they don't want this issue to come up again until 2012. they don't want to have this again until 2012. they want to talk about other things. we have this situation now where this debate has paralyzed the country
-- the other factor is that we are now drawing down the cost of our military efforts in afghanistan and iraq. last year we spent a little over $150 billion. this year we'll spend a little over $100 billion. and the plan is to soon be down to at least $50 billion in two or three years. so over the ten-year period there'll be about eight years at nearly $50 billion or so spent on the war instead of $150 billion. that's part of the plan that we've been operating on for a long time. $150 billion for the war is not baseline expenditure of the united states. it was never projected to continue at that level, so hopefully we could bring it below $50 billion. maybe we went get to $50 billion. i don't know. but what is the reasonable estimate? i think the house republicans and the president said it would drop to $50 billion, and that would be the baseline out there for the rest of the time. that's $1 trillion. that's $1 trillion. so you take $1 trillion out of the $2.7 trillion, you're down to $1.7 trillion. and another thing that's scored in that, since that $1 trillion in war costs is scored the way
in afghanistan and iraq and not really cutting the deficit. we're boring 40 cents on the dollar for every dollar that we spend in washington. and we cannot keep doing this. one thing i like to see is the repeal of obamacare. that alone would save us $2.5 trillion in the next 10 years. as far as the reid plan, i like to see him get it through the senate. i did not think that it would pass. host: couple we go to an independent in michigan, here is what the "new york times calls " says this morning. go ahead. caller: i called my representative yesterday and asked him to work with the president to compromise and make sure that the debt ceiling is raised over into 2013. this is destroying our economy. host: where do you see compromise? caller: th reid plan has cuts and take this off the table until 2013. i think that that makes sense. host: so you do not agree with republicans on this. caller: i do not. there is trillions of dollars being cut. let's take this and we don't want to make this something that the rest of the world is going to use against us. our dollar is worth nothing in the last 10 year
in iraq, afghanistan, and elsewhere. what we need to do is have a growth agenda. we need to reprioritize. so instead of subsidizing off-shore jobs, we are subsidizing the growth of manufacturing here in the united states. let me make my second point. this is what the is about. republicans put a bill on the floor that they call cut, cap, and balance. i called it cut, cap, balance, wink, and nod. it absolutely wasn't real. if you just lost your job, because it was out sourced. if you are the c.e.o., you made the million dollars, you get a $100,000 check in the mail tax cut. how is that fair? backbone of the american economy. and the bill on the floor was a kick to the stomach. we need solutions defend middle class than those who provide tax holes for the middle class. host: i want to ask about yesterday what was provided for the public? guest: if you were an auto broker, yeah, it was a good deal. but going into that deal, most was recouped. at the end of the process, yes, over $1 billion, if you are an auto worker, and you are checked your job, and we have a job analysis in the united stat
, republican congress and the bush years, wars in iraq, wars in afghanistan not paid for, prescription drug bill not paid for, and bush tax cuts for wealthiest americans which have caused most of the deficit, and the problem with the debt ceiling. now we are not calling on them to make some sacrifice and pay for it. most everybody in america knows about dieting. most of us are a little overweight. michelle obama will tell you that any day. we need to watch our weight. but when you go to diet, you got to reduce your calories, and you got to exercise some more. spend some calories, reduce some calories. that's the way you diet. the same thing with the budget. you got a problem at home with your budget, well, maybe you think i won't take that vacation and go to miami beach and stay in that three star hotel, i'll go to fort walton and stay in a two star hotel and maybe get another job or work some more overtime. increase your income, you decrease your spending. and you get it together. this congress, though, has got the problem because in dealing with this and the debt ceiling is independent of
down the cost of our military efforts in afghanistan and iraq. last year we spent a little over $150 billion. this year we'll spend a little over $100 billion. and the plan is to soon be down to at least $50 billion in two or three years. so over the ten-year period there'll be about eight years at nearly $50 billion or so spent on the war instead of $150 billion. that's part of thelan that we've been operating on for a long time. $150 billion for the w is not baseline expenditure of the united states. it was never projected to continue at that level, so hopefully we could bring it below $50 billion. maybe we went get to $50 billion. i don't know. but what is the reasonable estimate? i think the house republicans and the president said it would drop to $50 billion, and that would be the baseline out there for the rest of the time. that's $1 trillion. that's $1 trillion. so you take $1 trillion out of the $2.7 trillion, you're down to $1.7 trlion. and another thing that's scored in tt, since that $1 trillion in war costs is scored the way mr. reid scored that, which is phantom money,
trove of documents that have been released in the last year. the iraq war logs, the afghanistan war logs, and what has been called cablegate, as the u.s. state department documents that are continuing to be released. why does it matter so much? we will talk about that this afternoon, but let's just take one example that came out in the iraq war logs. february 2007. the war log show that to give you zero men were standing, iraqis under an apache helicopter. the men have their hands up. they clearly are attempting to surrender. the apache helicopter can see this. so they are not wrote. the soldiers called back to the base and asked what they should do. the lawyer in the bass says you cannot surrender to a helicopter, and they blow the man attempting to surrender away. that was february 2007. now, we will fast forward to july 12, 2007. video that has been released by wikileaks. this devastating video of an area of baghdad where a group of men were showing around two reuters journalists. one was an up-and-coming videographer, and one was this driver. he was 40 years old, father of four. they
the caller is right certainly in the case of pakistan and afghanistan. the united states lost sight of the importance of the region after the soviet the feet. certainly, i would hope there would be a sustained engagement that would be based on mutual respect and upon the principles that we mentioned earlier. with regards to what he mentioned about dealings in pakistan and elsewhere towards the united states, people in the middle east largely very much admire the united states for its educational institutions, the level of economic development, the basic rule of law, and so on. they were to come here, a study here, emigrate here, but there critical of some american policies. that is really the issue. we know what those policies are. host: last couple of calls. bloomington, illinois. caller: first of all, i just want to respond to the caller that the military saved muslims in southeast europe in kosovo. here is my question regarding europe. are there any elements in the arab spring in north africa that wants to integrate with europe? maybe in the future join the european union? at one
. somalia, chad, sudan, congo, haiti. zimbabwe, afghanistan, central african republic and iraq. guest: 2z no accident some of those countries have ended up at the worst end of the index. if you look at somalia, it is a country experiencing next, what does that mean for the wider world. we see there is enormous refugee flows. we've seen in the last couple of decades where there have been significant concerns here in washington about the ability of terrorists to operate due to the lack of governing. that is really why we should care that these states are there and should really take notice. for anyone who is at all familiar with international affairs, it doesn't take the fail-safe influence. if you see some of those other countries on the list, it's important to do those as well. if it weren't for bringing 240ez issues forward, the public is experiencing serious trouble. the countries are experiencing serious trouble. that's one of the key aspects. we are talking about the 2011 fail-state influence. here to talk with us is discussions. to get involved in the discussion call 202-624-1111 for
, secretary panetta and the president discussed implementation of our strategy in afghanistan, including consolidation and training afghan security forces, the reduction of u.s. troop levels that the president announced last month and process of transitioning lead security to the afghan government. the president thanked everyone for their service and said that he looked forward to working with them closely as they take up their important positions. >> any discussions about continuing concerns about weakening of the effort? >> not in this meeting. i believe we addressed that issue. the president feels very strongly that because of the success we have had in making progress towards achieving our goals, defeating, disrupting -- dismantle and defeat, reducing the -- stopping the momentum of the taliban and training of afghan security forces, we can begin to draw down our surge forces. 10,000 this year and 30,000 next year. >> has treasury secretary geithner told the president that he would like to leave -- >> not that i'm aware of no. >> i think he will be here for the foreseeable future. [c
-- the international computer underground." but with the iraq war logs, the afghanistan war laws, and the u.s. cables that have yet to be fully release, i would say that julian assange is perhaps the most widely published purpose on earth. -- person on earth. today will have a conversation about information and i would like to ask julianne to begin -- julian to begin by going back to that moment in 2007, and talk about the significance of those for you and why you have chosen to release this information. >> amy, on that criteria, perhaps rupert murdoch's goal most widely published person on earth, and people have said that australia has given two people to the world, rupert murdoch and me. begin publishing. [laughter] in some ways, things are very easy for us and for me. we make a promise to sources that if they give us material of a certain type of significance, of diplomatic, historic, or ethical significance, and they are under a certain threat, we will publish it. that is actually and up. we have a goal with publishing material. it has been my long-term believe that what advances of civilization
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)